Opinion
September 25, 1995
Appeal from the Family Court, Nassau County (Joseph, J.).
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant's contentions that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he knew that he did not have the consent of the owner of the subject vehicle and to specifically identify the vehicle are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Rodriguez, 200 A.D.2d 775; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant's identity as a perpetrator of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the fact-finding order was not against the weight of the evidence. Sullivan, J.P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.